Can Christians Do Good For Goodness Sake?

[MajinCry]

Are you ever not triggered?

But The Red Pill says he's the true victim!

 

[Blue_Max]

Are you ever not triggered?

Projection. Only sobbing lefties claim Twitter PTSD.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Projection. Only sobbing lefties claim Twitter PTSD.

That's a "no," then. Got it.

 

[bshole]

Projection. Only sobbing lefties claim Twitter PTSD.

That is a nice assertion. Citation?

Here is mine:

Christians have become increasingly anxious about the state of religious freedom in the United States, with a big majority saying they're facing growing levels of persecution, a newly released poll shows.

The LifeWay Research survey finds 63 percent of respondents say they're facing more persecution — with 38 percent saying they "strongly agree" with the statement, an increase from 2013, when 50 percent thought persecution was growing, and 28 percent strongly agreed.

Sixty percent said religious liberty is on the decline in America, up from 54 percent in 2013, the poll found.

Religious freedom != Ability to force your Christian views using the force of government

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/christians-face-increase-persecution/2016/04/05/id/722381/

 

[Hugo Drax]

Christians want to impose their version Shaira law.

 

[Moonbeam]

People can suggest all kinds of reasons for believing in God but they aren't acceptable to you. We could maybe explore why that is so.

Could we also explore the flip-side of why for so many people it's not so?

Most of us grow up believing in a lot of lies and fairy tales. Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, fairies and pixies and unicorns, oh my! And we outgrow them. They're happy little thoughts and they make us feel good, but when we finally learn the truth we're capable of letting them go. We can put logic, reason and evidence ahead of delusion, superstition and blind faith. Why not god? What is it that allows a person to discard Santa Claus when overwhelming evidence says he's not real, but makes that same person cling to the belief in god even more zealously when the evidence says he's not real?

What exactly do you mean by the flip side?

Your points make all the sense in the world for imaginary beings from bunnies to cloud sitting deities. What you don't know because you have no experience with it, is that God isn't an imaginary being, His existence isn't out there on a cloud but a realization that occurs at a higher conscious state. You can't prove that such a God exists, you can only experience His reality by the science of conscious evolution, via extinction of thought and ego. You can't stop having an ego because any attempt you make to stop it would just be more it hiding itself from you. The ego can't kill itself. And you can't stop thought for the same reason. None the less one can experience ego death and the ending of thought and I have heard it's the very best place a mind can be, that being one with the universe is quite a big deal.

So don't be too closed minded about Christians. We all know how horrible they can be, as horrible as any other group of people still infected with self hate. None the less, as I said, more leap over the pit of self hate and transcend to a God conscious state via Christianity than Atheists gain realization by single-handedly rooting our their self hate. They at least have a moral objective and a loving Christ to inspire the best in them. This best in all of us, they call Christ, and Jesus attained a God conscious state and set out to consciously sacrifice His life so that self haters could be told they have been forgiven.

You, and most of them, but they better than you, can't imagine the enormous shift in your state of consciousness that would occur if you could believe you actually have been forgiven. The purpose of faith is to believe it even though you don't. If you love God enough your love for Him will become identical to His love for you and you won't know the difference. Then you will know that God is real and that He has always been as close to you as your own heart.

So there is every reason in the world to doubt in the existence of the God Christians imagine exists out there in the universe somewhere. And the damage Christians do though their hypocritical uncured self hate is immense in history. But buried in all that shit there still survives a glimmer of what Christlike actually is. So in this there is inspirational potential, a finger that points to our human psychological potential. What do Atheists bring to the table? Do they have anything to offer in the way of self forgiveness. I hope so, because I'm as much atheist as believer, or as much not either.

 

[bshole]

So there is every reason in the world to doubt in the existence of the God Christians imagine exists out there in the universe somewhere. And the damage Christians do though their hypocritical uncured self hate is immense in history. But buried in all that shit there still survives a glimmer of what Christlike actually is. So in this there is inspirational potential, a finger that points to our human psychological potential. What do Atheists bring to the table? Do they have anything to offer in the way of self forgiveness. I hope so, because I'm as much atheist as believer, or as much not either.

Isn't that consequentialism? I don't like reality, what can you offer that is better? I don't believe that is how reality works, that sound more like how delusion works. If I could believe delusion to make myself happy, I would. Unfortunately my brain is incapable of working like that.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Well, let's see about that. You said:

I took this to imply that I suppose Christians believe in a certain idea of god, and while you agree that idea is not instantiated in reality, nonetheless a different idea of god is the real one in which Christians believe, and that one *is* instantiated in reality. I really don't see any other way to take it. You are agreeing that at least one particular idea of god does not exist, but being that you are a theist, you nonetheless believe a god does exist.

But the reality is that each and every god is "the god that I don't believe in." If you "get it" that I don't believe in any gods, then what you said is equivalent to saying that all gods do not exist. Is that what you believe? I hardly think so. So either you don't get it, you didn't think your statement through before writing it, or you're trying to play some kind of game.

Which is it?

You freely use the word god...what does that word mean to you? Please bear with me here.

I don't quite understand your characterization of this as "shooting fish in a barrel." You said, "there is no "proof" that anyone could give you that would meet your standards. You know that, I know that." I refuted that idea by presenting a fairly simple counterexample to your claim. I don't see where that connects to this distinct point of "Christianity is a fallible religious construct." Was the idea that Christianity is a fallible human creation a point of contention in your mind? What does that have to do with your claim that no proof could ever "meet my standards"?

I'm saying that poking holes in religions is child's play. No one can give you proof the God exists...you're effectively asking for proof that bananas taste good without ever having tasted one. Unfortunately I can't hand one to you to prove it to your satisfaction. I can only hope that you come across one in your meanderings through life. God is experiential as I'm sure you've been told many times in these types of discussions. Cognitive proof involves direct and profound personal experience and can't be imparted any other way. This is why I say that the kind of (non-experiential) proof you seek doesn't exist. My comment regarding Christianity being a fallible human construct was to equate poking holes in it is like kicking a man when he's already down....there is no profit in it except to sate one's ego by demonstrating one's domination and superiority over those perceived to be weaker in some way. I see no point in it...as everybody needs a "reality" paradigm...even you...no matter how false you perceive anothers "reality" to be or how true you personally perceive yours to be.

I want everyone to apply consistent standards for testing their beliefs' correspondence to reality. Every line of evidence I've been presented in defense of any particular god's existence by any believer or apologist in my considerable experience debating theism and religion could equally justify the existence of one if not several gods in which that theist does not believe. Some loon says he hears the voice of god, but he's in dirty rags smelling of urine on the street and Christians will laugh at him. You put Jimmy Swaggart on the television saying the same things and they'll send him the last two pennies they had to rub together, and then go beat a homosexual within an inch of his life.

So you want others to think and behave in a way that reflects your version of "reality". Look at yourself and what "reality" looked like when you were 5, 15, 30, or 60 years old if applicable. Point being that your mere perception of reality does not in any way define some all-encompassing quintessential reality. Only about 3% of the population in this country are self-avowed atheists and 4% are agnostic. Has the thought ever crossed your mind that you may be wrong?

Of course they do! Because they lack the courage to accept their experiences on their own terms, and instead feel compelled to dress them up in the dogma of somebody else's religion!

I agree with you that many don't know what else to do with their experiences except to dress them up in the dogma of religion. But to frame this as merely 'lack of courage' is simplistic and most likely a reflection of your bias...consider their perceptions and the culture they've lived in their entire life and the lack of alternatives available to explain and affirm their experiences.

That's exactly why I'm here taunting everyone to explain to me why they are justified claiming that their experiences have anything to do with their pet diety, and nobody will!

I'm doing my best to explain this from my perception of "reality".

 

[Puffnstuff]

If we're taking a page out of God's books for morals, then the Westboro lads have it on-point; God really does hate fags.

In true hypocritical fashion they've chosen to ignore Matthew 7 where Jesus tells Christians not to point fingers at other people. Their behavior mirrors that of the Sadducees, Pharisees and the Scribes and is truly deplorable.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

You freely use the word god...what does that word mean to you? Please bear with me here.

That's a fair question, because the word can stand for subtly different things depending on the context. Most generally, it denotes "an idea of a supreme being / creator in the minds of theists." If you see me capitalize the word, then I'm likely trying to indicate the JudeoChristian God specifically.

I'm saying that poking holes in religions is child's play. No one can give you proof the God exists...you're effectively asking for proof that bananas taste good without ever having tasted one.

That's nonsense. Theists assert that their god is an element of objective reality, so it is subject to empirical investigation. If you mean to suggest that gods are ONLY ideas and have no objective reality, then we'd agree.

Unfortunately I can't hand one to you to prove it to your satisfaction.

That's something gods have curiously in common with other imaginary beings, isn't it?

I can only hope that you come across one in your meanderings through life. God is experiential as I'm sure you've been told many times in these types of discussions. Cognitive proof involves direct and profound personal experience and can't be imparted any other way. This is why I say that the kind of (non-experiential) proof you seek doesn't exist. My comment regarding Christianity being a fallible human construct was to equate poking holes in it is like kicking a man when he's already down....there is no profit in it except to sate one's ego by demonstrating one's domination and superiority over those perceived to be weaker in some way. I see no point in it...as everybody needs a "reality" paradigm...even you...no matter how false you perceive anothers "reality" to be or how true you personally perceive yours to be.

Oh, hogwash. Theists aren't going around telling everybody that god is just a feeling.

So you want others to think and behave in a way that reflects your version of "reality".

No, not at all, and I have to wonder if you even read what I wrote. I want theists to be consistent. They don't fear magical fairies are going to hide their car keys in the night or that Loki the trickster is creating illusions of cars on the road while they drive, but a bunch of superstitious goat herders wrote that God created the world in 7 days, flooded the entire earth, and Jesus ascended to heaven 2000 years ago, and "DOGGONE IT GOD SAID IT, I BELIEVE IT, THAT SETTLES IT!!!"

Look at yourself and what "reality" looked like when you were 5, 15, 25, 50 years old. Point being that your mere perception of reality does not in any way define some all-encompassing quintessential reality. Only about 3% of the population in this country are self-avowed atheists and 4% are agnostic. Has the thought ever crossed your mind that you may be wrong?

What the fuck do atheistic population numbers have to do with anything?

I agree with you that many don't know what else to do with their experiences except to dress them up in the dogma of religion. But to frame this as merely 'lack of courage' is simplistic and most likely a reflection of your bias...consider their perceptions and the culture they've lived in their entire life and the lack of alternatives available to explain and affirm their experiences.

Ok then, its wanton ignorance, cowardice, or both. You decide. The point remains.

I'm doing my best to explain this from my perception of "reality".

Ok so how do you know your feelings have anything to do with a god?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

That's a fair question, because the word can stand for subtly different things depending on the context. Most generally, it denotes "an idea of a supreme being / creator in the minds of theists." If you see me capitalize the word, then I'm likely trying to indicate the JudeoChristian God specifically.



That's nonsense. Theists assert that their god is an element of objective reality, so it is subject to empirical investigation. If you mean to suggest that gods are ONLY ideas and have no objective reality, then we'd agree.



That's something gods have curiously in common with other imaginary beings, isn't it?


Oh, hogwash. Theists aren't going around telling everybody that god is just a feeling.



No, not at all, and I have to wonder if you even read what I wrote. I want theists to be consistent. They don't fear magical fairies are going to hide their car keys in the night or that Loki the trickster is creating illusions of cars on the road while they drive, but a bunch of superstitious goat herders wrote that God created the world in 7 days, flooded the entire earth, and Jesus ascended to heaven 2000 years ago, and "DOGGONE IT GOD SAID IT, I BELIEVE IT, THAT SETTLES IT!!!"


What the fuck do atheistic population numbers have to do with anything?


Ok then, its wanton ignorance, cowardice, or both. You decide. The point remains.


Ok so how do you know your feelings have anything to do with a god?

Nonsense and hogwash is all I can offer. I can see that this is going nowhere fast and I really don't have the time nor desire to engage in what now appears to be an exercise in futility. An internet forum sucks for these kinds of discussions anyway...best done in person over a beer or two imo. I'm out (at least for a while). Peace.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Religious freedom != Ability to force your Christian views using the force of government

Actually under the CRA Title VII everyone is entitled to the freedom of religion. If someone, regardless of faith or affiliation, begins to push their beliefs in any form (spoken, written or objectively through the display of faith specific paraphernalia) and it offends you it has now violated your religious freedom. You have the right to inform them that their display offends you and ask them to stop with it at which point they are obligated to cease and desist their actions or it constitutes a Title VII violation of your freedom of religion rights. Now that the republicans are coming into power you can expect for them to try to amend it to retain the support of the far right. The controlling political party dictates how administrative laws and rules are interpreted so expect a shift in this area.

I understand your angle because I find persons who are pushy about their denomination/faith to be out of alignment with a work environment. Some people feel the need to make a display or other outward theatrical display of their given faith to fulfill some inner need. These people make me shake my head and they learned this behavior at church. Seminaries teach people how to combine theatrics with motivational speaking techniques and we've all seen how that turns out as people often equate it with a moving of the spirit or a good sermon when its just psychological shaping.

I cannot stand how the money changers have taken over Christianity and turned it into a giant money making machine. The free gift of God is now a money making circus, the word is for sale turning a profit for whomever will put it up for sale. Christian literature is for sale everywhere, any band can call themselves Christian, use the word God or some other widely accepted Christian terminology in their lyrics and is immediately accepted by the faithful which turns even more profit. I see businesses advertised all over town with the fish symbols on their ads for people to make the association that they are Christians and to do business with them in the name of profit. I will not buy any Christian material/merchandise at all period as I reject it all!

 

[GagHalfrunt]

I cannot stand how the money changers have taken over Christianity and turned it into a giant money making machine.

Holy crap, how can a person be that ignorant about his own faith? Oh, right, right, if you had even the vaguest understanding of what Christianity really is or what the bible really says you wouldn't be a Christian in the first place. Taken over? Turned into? Christ almighty are you clueless.

Do you know why priests are not allowed to marry? And don't spout off that "a man cannot serve two masters" bullshit that the uber-ignorant have been trained to spout like good little sheep. Priests were allowed to marry for about 1000 years. Priests were the sons of priests, popes were the sons of popes. It was a family business. And a business it was. The Catholic Church, the dominant force in Christianity, got into fear pimping for profit. They sold indulgences. I shouldn't have to explain this, any so-called Christian should know this shit, but you clearly don't. Indulgences were get out of hell free cards that the church sold to the gullible which is anyone that believes in the church. You could be forgiven any sin and guaranteed a spot in heaven for a big enough donation. And what happened? The priests got rich. Stinking rich. Filthy rich. Around the start of the second millennium priests were the richest men in Europe. They swindled enough money to become richer than the merchants, the bankers, even the nobility.

And what happens when a rich married man dies? Who gets the money? The wife and kids. That didn't sit well with the pope at the time who thought that since they were working for the church that it was the church's money. I think it was one of the Gregory's who outlawed marriage so that rich priests would have no choice but to leave the church their fortune when they died. So he banned marriages, but grandfathered in existing marriages with the provision that wives and kids couldn't inherit. That was a mistake. The rich priests knew what was happening and began divesting themselves of their riches before they died. In the meantime Gregory died and another pope took over, one of the Urban's and he was smarter than Gregory. He saw that priests were giving their money away to their wives and kids before they died to get around that new no inheritance rule and he wouldn't have any of that. So Urban dissolved all existing priest marriages, seized all their money and sold their wives and kids into slavery so that the church could get their hands on every penny the priests had and every penny the priests would make moving forward. The great invisible man in the sky must have approved, he didn't step in to stop the priests wives and children being sold into slavery just so the church could get the money.

Taken over? Turned into? ROFLMAO!! Religion has ALWAYS been about the money.

 

[FelixDeCat]

Ironically every living human makes their own moral compass, Christians just credit a non-existent entity for it.

Felix, how could you prove that God created your moral compass? Your moral compass is nothing more than neurons firing in a particular order.... how do you prove that God makes them fire in the same order for all humans to establish this moral code? How do you explain the differences in moral code between all the Christian sects..... why is God giving each of them a different moral code?

Why is it sinful and wrong to require evidence to believe in something?

bshole, people do ultimately make their own choices, but if you had the benefit of at least knowing the rules (no stealing, no killing, no tax evasion, etc), they would be able to make more informed choices. The beginning of moral code starts with the Ten Commandments from an existing entity known as God.

You however choose to whine and moan about these commandments. Furthermore, nowhere has it ever been said by me that that it is wrong to find your own proof instead of goading others into some convoluted game that you and other atheists like to play.

 

[FelixDeCat]

Holy crap, how can a person be that ignorant about his own faith?.

Holy crap, your slanted and twisted views are in no way accurate or acceptable. Your own personal dark viewpoint shows through, no doubt a symptom of your atheism. Let go of the hate. Believe.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

^ No counterargument. No evidence. Just gainsaying and authoritarian commandments. If you buy that bullshit, you should be ashamed.

 

[sandorski]

Shouldn't all this be considered bannable hate speech? After all, if the same were said about islam it would be...

No and No.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Shouldn't all this be considered bannable hate speech? After all, if the same were said about islam it would be...

Bullshit cleanup on aisle 5 please.

 

[Puffnstuff]

^ No counterargument. No evidence. Just gainsaying and authoritarian commandments. If you buy that bullshit, you should be ashamed.

2 Timothy 2:15-16
…15Make every effort to present yourself approved to God, an unashamed workman who accurately handles the word of truth. 16But avoid irreverent and empty chatter, which will only lead to more ungodliness, 17and the talk of such men will spread like gangrene.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

2 Timothy 2:15-16
…15Make every effort to present yourself approved to God, an unashamed workman who accurately handles the word of truth. 16But avoid irreverent and empty chatter, which will only lead to more ungodliness, 17and the talk of such men will spread like gangrene.

And yet irreverent empty chatter is exactly what he posted. No substance whatsoever, like I said. Don't you recognize that? What's the matter with you?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

On a related subject, what's up with you religidiots quoting bible verses at me like it has any kind of credibility or authority? What it tells me is that you really don't give a shit about substantiation or intellectual integrity, and would rather just stroke your own faith-cock in front of everybody. It's just gross.

 

[IronWing]

On a related subject, what's up with you religidiots quoting bible verses at me like it has any kind of credibility or authority? What it tells me is that you really don't give a shit about substantiation or intellectual integrity, and would rather just stroke your own faith-cock in front of everybody. It's just gross.

Okay, that's a new one.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Okay, that's a new one.

Happy to keep things fresh. The point of course is that he's just wanking his religion to make himself feel good. He hasn't done anything in attempt to be objectively persuasive by quoting some random scripture.

 

[Moonbeam]

bshole: Isn't that consequentialism? I don't like reality, what can you offer that is better? I don't believe that is how reality works, that sound more like how delusion works. If I could believe delusion to make myself happy, I would. Unfortunately my brain is incapable of working like that.

We see the same things. There is no god, no life after death, life is totally meaningless and empty. We lost our faith. It seems to have made you miserable. It killed me. I gave up and died and woke up in heaven, into a timelessness of love in being. Everything I had hoped to find, everything I thought I had lost was suddenly back in my hands. I know there is a God because I saw thought His eyes even if just briefly. What I experienced tells me that one of us is delusional. And for reasons that should be instantly apparent, I don't give a fig if it's me. But to say I suffered a delusion just seems totally preposterous to me because I only saw when I had totally given up and surrendered. I didn't retain some fragment of belief or rationalize some miracle dream, I totally quit, dropped out, died. I surrendered fully knowing I would never ever ever ever be happy again. The part of me that could die did and the part of me that couldn't became the new me. I highly recommend looking for that part. It does not suffer. Only the ego does.

Religion will always exist as long as we have a true self that is hidden. What you call that true self is irrelevant. The word god is quite commonly used. But from one monkey to another, since we are laughing up in the trees, I would just say, "Have a banana." And savor it while you chew.

 

[bshole]

bshole, people do ultimately make their own choices, but if you had the benefit of at least knowing the rules (no stealing, no killing, no tax evasion, etc), they would be able to make more informed choices. The beginning of moral code starts with the Ten Commandments from an existing entity known as God.

I can illustrate the problem with your thesis by example.

You and I both agree that it is immoral and disgusting to torture an animal for your own personal pleasure. The problem is that the Bible has no injunction against such an act. The question arises, where did you get your belief that it is a moral evil to torture animals for pleasure? My answer is that you and I both got our morals from the societies around us.

You believe that God is against animal torture because you are against animal torture. You PROJECT your already existing morals onto your God. Do you really think it is a coincidence that your God has the exact same moral code as yourself? Do you think it is a coincidence that every person of faith has a God with the exact same moral code as themself?

This gets really sticky when a Christian PROJECTS a 21st century moral code onto a 2000 year old God. Then the apologetics have to be pulled out as the Christian defends slavery, genocide, human sacrifice, etc..... ie. a moral code that is completely anathema to them. The cognitive dissonance is absolutely painful to watch.